US20160086265A1 - System and Method of Relative Channel Capacity based securities trading - Google Patents

System and Method of Relative Channel Capacity based securities trading Download PDF

Info

Publication number
US20160086265A1
US20160086265A1 US14/492,007 US201414492007A US2016086265A1 US 20160086265 A1 US20160086265 A1 US 20160086265A1 US 201414492007 A US201414492007 A US 201414492007A US 2016086265 A1 US2016086265 A1 US 2016086265A1
Authority
US
United States
Prior art keywords
securities
trading
computer
market
markets
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Abandoned
Application number
US14/492,007
Inventor
Edgar Parker, JR.
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Individual
Original Assignee
Individual
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Individual filed Critical Individual
Priority to US14/492,007 priority Critical patent/US20160086265A1/en
Publication of US20160086265A1 publication Critical patent/US20160086265A1/en
Abandoned legal-status Critical Current

Links

Images

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
    • G06Q40/00—Finance; Insurance; Tax strategies; Processing of corporate or income taxes
    • G06Q40/04—Trading; Exchange, e.g. stocks, commodities, derivatives or currency exchange

Definitions

  • the trader would need to select securities that will not result in a violation of the relative channel capacity limits.
  • the trader would need to be able to receive and communicate information to each market before price changes (or any price changes outside desired limits) caused trading opportunities to evaporate (or have a much lower probability of success).
  • a security or securities must be selected that would allow the two relations CC LA ⁇ 2CC A (T LA /T A ), CC LB ⁇ 2CC B (T LB /T B ) to be true.
  • CC LA and CC LB are the channel capacities (bits/second) of the trader's communication links to the markets A and B respectively.
  • L A , L B (Distance from A or B to X respectively).
  • CC A and CC B are the information generating rate (bits/second) of the price series at markets A and B.
  • CC LA ⁇ 2k ⁇ a T LA /T A
  • CC LB ⁇ 2k ⁇ b T LB /T B
  • ⁇ a and ⁇ b are the volatilities of a single security at markets A and B respectively
  • k is an adjustment factor (k may be set to 1 for simplicity).
  • FIG. 1 an illustrative diagram of process 100 which is an exemplary the optimal relative channel capacity based selection of securities to be traded in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • Rates Ra and Rb can be measured in bit/sec or by the standard deviations (or volatilities) of ⁇ a ⁇ b of the prices Pa and Pb (where Pa and Pb are the prices of the same commodity or security at market A and B respectively.
  • Securities that satisfy the relationships dictated by the relative channel capacity equations are selected for trading by a traded located between the markets.
  • CC LA and CC LB are the channel capacities of the fiber optical or other communication link between markets A and trading point X ( 103 ), and between market B and trading point X respectively.
  • L A and L B are the distances from the markets A and B to the trading point X respectively.
  • T LA and T LB are the times it takes signals to travel from markets A and B to trading point X respectively.
  • FIG. 2 is a block diagram generally illustrating an example of a computer system that may be used in implementing aspects of the present disclosure.
  • the computer system may have one or more processors 210 , one or more non-transitory computer storage media 220 or memory, and one or more non-volatile storage media 230 .
  • the processor 210 may execute one or more instructions stored in one or more computer-readable storage media (or memory 220 ).
  • L max (CC L *T A * c)/2CC A *index of refraction).
  • This relationship between the temporally adjusted channel capacities of the communication link and the markets will be referred in this work hereafter as the Relative Channel Capacity (RCC) of the linked system.
  • This relationship is captured in the following equation: CC L ⁇ 2CC A (T L /T A ). Specifically this relationship models a roundtrip communication from market A to B or B to A. The roundtrip is needed first to detect a price difference at the opposite markets and then to send of buy/sell responses to the opposite markets.
  • RCC is the traditional channel capacity of the market participant relative to the volatility of the price series and to the participant's distance from the market (L). Relative Channel Capacity is described by the equations below:
  • T L T Speed of link +T message length
  • T L L/(c/IR)+Xbits/CC L ; where Xbits is the message length.
  • Xbits the message length.
  • the price or information messages sent and the trader's buy and sell responses are assumed to be composed of a similar number of bits for simplicity. This assumption can be easily relaxed without affecting the overall analysis to follow. Later in the paper is CC A is assumed to incorporate the total information that may be used in analyzing a security, and not just the price series as seen in this section.
  • T L can be elucidated by a simple analogy to a train traveling from point A to point B. Replace channel capacity and bits with train speed and train length respectively.
  • the front of the train takes T train front seconds (Speed*distance) to move from A to B. However the rear of the train reaches B at some time later than the front at time T train front +T train length in time .
  • T L L/(c/IR)+Xbits/CC L +T C . [Where T C is the time needed to calculate the existence of and execution of a hypothetical trade (i.e. total computer and computer program speed). In most of the paper T C will be assumed to be included in T L when not explicitly mentioned].
  • the relationship additionally illustrates changes in the system dynamics as the variables are changed.
  • L the length of the communication link must also grow.
  • ⁇ CC L ⁇ 2T L
  • the channel capacity of the link must grow at least twice as fast as the link's length to avoid information loss.
  • K(t 1 )
  • K-.

Abstract

A trader at a specific location from a market or markets may have advantages in trading some securities over other securities. Relative channel capacity analysis could reveal specifically which securities that the trader's location would favor in terms of trading at the market or markets. Additionally the trader could use the relative channel capacity analysis to determine which securities she might have an advantage or disadvantage in trading relative to other traders at other locations.

Description

    RELATED APPLICATIONS
  • The present application claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. .sctn.119(e) of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/880,907, filed Sep. 21, 2013, entitled “System and Method of Relative Channel Capacity based securities trading,” which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
    • REFERENCE
  • “Efficient Markets Meet the Shannon Limit,” 1st edition and 2nd editions authored by the inventor of the present application Edgar Parker, Jr. and published on Amazon Digital Services, Inc. in September 2013 and September 2014 respectively which are incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
    • SUMMARY
  • The trader would need to select securities that will not result in a violation of the relative channel capacity limits. The trader would need to be able to receive and communicate information to each market before price changes (or any price changes outside desired limits) caused trading opportunities to evaporate (or have a much lower probability of success). A security or securities must be selected that would allow the two relations CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA), CCLB≧2CCB(TLB/TB) to be true.
  • Where a trader is located at a position X between two markets A and B. CCLA and CCLB are the channel capacities (bits/second) of the trader's communication links to the markets A and B respectively. LA, LB=(Distance from A or B to X respectively). Information travel times along LA are LB are to and from the markets are given by TLA=LA/(C/index of refraction) and TLB=LB/(C/index of refraction). CCA and CCB are the information generating rate (bits/second) of the price series at markets A and B.
  • Instead of CCA and CCB the volatilities of the tested security can be utilized as seen in CCLA≧2kσa(TLA/TA) CCLB≧2kσb(TLB/TB). Here σa and σb are the volatilities of a single security at markets A and B respectively and k is an adjustment factor (k may be set to 1 for simplicity). Securities that satisfy both equations will not violate the Shannon limit and will have a higher probability of successful trades when compared with securities that violate the relative channel capacity relations. These (Or equivalently to be excluded from possible trading).
  • Note the same analysis could be performed on a communication link connected to just one market. In that case the endpoint where the trader, computer, and/or server is located is X which is some measureable physical distance from the desired market. The same relation would need to hold CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA), or CCLA≧2kσa(TLA/TA) for the optimal relative channel capacity based selection of securities to be possibly traded (Or equivalently to be excluded from possible trading).
    • BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS
  • The accompanying drawings are not intended to be drawn to scale. In the drawings, each identical or nearly identical component that is illustrated in various figures is represented by a like numeral. For purposes of clarity, not every component may be labeled in every drawing. In the drawings:
  • FIG. 1 an illustrative diagram of process 100 which is an exemplary the optimal relative channel capacity based selection of securities to be traded in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure. Information arrives at markets A and B (101 and 102) at rates Ra=Ra respectively. Rates Ra and Rb can be measured in bit/sec or by the standard deviations (or volatilities) of σaσb of the prices Pa and Pb (where Pa and Pb are the prices of the same commodity or security at market A and B respectively. Securities that satisfy the relationships dictated by the relative channel capacity equations are selected for trading by a traded located between the markets. CCLA and CCLB are the channel capacities of the fiber optical or other communication link between markets A and trading point X (103), and between market B and trading point X respectively. LA and LB are the distances from the markets A and B to the trading point X respectively. TLA and TLB are the times it takes signals to travel from markets A and B to trading point X respectively.
  • FIG. 2 is a block diagram generally illustrating an example of a computer system that may be used in implementing aspects of the present disclosure. The computer system may have one or more processors 210, one or more non-transitory computer storage media 220 or memory, and one or more non-volatile storage media 230. The processor 210 may execute one or more instructions stored in one or more computer-readable storage media (or memory 220).
    •  BACKGROUND Relative Channel Capacity
  • In the preceding discussion the interplay of the rate of information arrival and processing at the local market versus the rate of information transport along the fiber optic cable length determined Lmax. Where Lmax=(CCL*TA* c)/2CCA*index of refraction). The key concepts are the channel capacities of the individual markets CCA or CCB (CCA=CCB for simplicity can be easily generalized to CCA≠CCB without changing main results) versus that of the communication link CCL connecting the markets. These are related by the relative amount of time TL/TA that it takes the same signal to traverse the link versus the average time between the arrival of new information at the markets. In actual calculations measures such as volatility prices change per time period may be used as a proxy for market or individual security channel capacity. This relationship between the temporally adjusted channel capacities of the communication link and the markets will be referred in this work hereafter as the Relative Channel Capacity (RCC) of the linked system. The familiar standard channel capacity (CC=#bits/1 sec transmission rate at any point on the cable) of the cable stays the same no matter its length. However, information must travel from Markets A, B through link L at least as fast as it arrives at the markets to avoid information loss. The loss of information can be thought of the loss of a price signal, the insertion of a false signal, the lagging or delay of a price signal beyond immediate arbitrage time relevance. This relationship is captured in the following equation: CCL≧2CCA(TL/TA). Specifically this relationship models a roundtrip communication from market A to B or B to A. The roundtrip is needed first to detect a price difference at the opposite markets and then to send of buy/sell responses to the opposite markets.
  • Formally RCC is the traditional channel capacity of the market participant relative to the volatility of the price series and to the participant's distance from the market (L). Relative Channel Capacity is described by the equations below:

  • CC L≧2CC A(T L /T A); RCC=CC L/2CC A(T L /T A)≧1 or (CC L/2)(2I(σ))(T L /ΔT)≧1
      • RCC=Relative Channel Capacity
      • L=physical distance from the market
      • CCL=channel capacity of the market participant
      • I(σ)=CCA=information generation rate of the volatility of the price series at time scale ΔT
      • Tmessage length=(Price or buy/sell message size of X bits)/CCL=X bits/CCL
      • Tmax=(CCL*ΔT)/2I(σi) is the maximum RCC derived time TL to complete the 1 way communication, and TC=Computation Time
  • A quick explanatory note about the TL variable follows. The true total one-way communication time to the market is denoted by by TL=TSpeed of link+Tmessage length or TL=L/(c/IR)+Xbits/CCL; where Xbits is the message length. For the market (or the price generating mechanism) the number of prices generated per period determines the number of bits generated per time period which can be described as Xbits=CCAΔt. The price or information messages sent and the trader's buy and sell responses are assumed to be composed of a similar number of bits for simplicity. This assumption can be easily relaxed without affecting the overall analysis to follow. Later in the paper is CCA is assumed to incorporate the total information that may be used in analyzing a security, and not just the price series as seen in this section.
  • TL can be elucidated by a simple analogy to a train traveling from point A to point B. Replace channel capacity and bits with train speed and train length respectively. The front of the train takes Ttrain front seconds (Speed*distance) to move from A to B. However the rear of the train reaches B at some time later than the front at time Ttrain front+Ttrain length in time. Where Ttrain length in time=(Train Speed*train length). Therefore TL=((Train Speed*distance)+(Train Speed*train length)). Similarly TL=L/(c/IR)+Xbits/CCL+TC. [Where TC is the time needed to calculate the existence of and execution of a hypothetical trade (i.e. total computer and computer program speed). In most of the paper TC will be assumed to be included in TL when not explicitly mentioned].
  • If the market participant's RCC<1 (or equivalently TL>Tmax), the price series at time scale ΔT will change before roundtrip communication with the market is completed. The market participant is not able to interact with the complete price series and important variables such as the true volatility experienced by the market participant will be affected.
  • The relationship additionally illustrates changes in the system dynamics as the variables are changed. As the distance between the markets grows the length L of the communication link must also grow. As L increase so does the time TL (TL=L/(C/index of refraction)+Xbits/CCL) that it takes for information to travel from A to B and vice versa. If we hold all other variables constant then ΔCCL=Δ2TL, and the channel capacity of the link must grow at least twice as fast as the link's length to avoid information loss.
    • Continuum of Arbitrage Dynamics as L Varies
  • To motivate the discussion first assume there is some distance L at which it makes economic sense to construct a proprietary communication network between markets for the purpose of latency arbitrage. Economic sense would imply that CCL≧2CCA(TL/TA) which means that the communication link owner market could at either end receive price information and respond to that information before prices change again. Also assume that other market participants cannot also create a similar link (perhaps the current link owner owns land between the markets and refuses to allow competitor construction). Define K- to be the minimally profitable separation between prices of the same commodity at the geographically distanced markets A and B. Also assume that K(t0)=K-=|Pa(t0)−Pb(t0)| When the trades are completed at or before time t1, then K(t1)=|Pa(t1)−Pb(t1)|=K(t0)=|Pa(t0)−Pb(t0)|=K-.
  • Prices changing before the market participants can react can be seen as a loss of information. At Lsmall<<Lmax the rate of transmission between markets CCLsmall>>CCA or CCB would greatly exceed information arrival at the individual markets from the outside world. L could be gradually increased with no loss of information as long as CCL>>2CCA(TL/TA). As long as this condition is satisfied the traders will know with certainty that the observed prices Pa and Pb will remain in effect until their trades are completed as seen in the discussion above. The traders' latency advantage gives them certain profits.
  • However at some length greater than Lmax, CCL<2CCA(TL/TA) and the prices observed at t0 change before the market participants' trades are completed at time t1.
  • The traders can no longer be certain of their latency based profits if price changes are missed. In fact as L increased beyond Lmax the traders go from 100% certainty of profits to only expecting profits 50% of the time when observing K(t0)=|Pa(t0)−Pb(t0)|, since half of the values of K now fall above and below K- (Where K-=minimally profitable separation between prices).

Claims (4)

1. A method for the determination of the optimal selection of securities to be traded by a trader who is located along a communication link a certain distance from a single market;
using a computer, and/or server which is programmed to select for trading those securities that satisfy the relationships CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA) and/or CCLA≧2kσa(TLA/TA).
2. A method for the determination of the optimal selection of securities to be traded by a trader, who is located along a communication link between at least two markets; using a computer, and/or server which is programmed to select for trading those securities that satisfy the relationships CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA), CCLB≧2CCB(TLB/TB) and/or CCLA≧2kσa(TLA/TA), CCLB≧2kσb(TLB/TB).
3. A method for the determination of the optimal selection of securities to be excluded from trading by a trader who is located along a communication link a certain distance from a single market; using a computer, and/or server which is programmed to select for exclusion from trading those securities that do not satisfy the relationships CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA) and/or CCLA≧2σa(TLA/TA).
4. A method for the determination of the optimal selection of securities to be excluded from trading by a trader, who is located along a communication link between at least two markets; using a computer, and/or server which is programmed to select for exclusion from trading those securities that do not satisfy the relationships CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA), CCLB≧2CCB(TLB/TB) and/or CCLA>2kaa(TLA/TA), CCLB≧2kσb(TLB/TB).
Steps for claim 1:
1. A group of securities potentially desired to be traded are tested on a computer or computer server using a computer program for the satisfaction of relationships CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA) and/or CCLA≧2kσa(TLA/TA).
2. Those securities satisfying the relationship are selected for possible trading at the market.
Steps for claim 2:
1. A group of securities potentially desired to be traded are tested on a computer or computer server using a computer program for satisfaction of relationships CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA), CCLB≧2CCB(TLB/TB) and/or CCLA≧2kσa(TLA/TA), CCLB≧2kσb(TLB/TB).
2. Those securities satisfying the relationship are selected for possible trading at the market.
Steps for claim 3:
1. A group of securities potentially desired to be traded are tested on a computer or computer server using a computer program for satisfaction of relationships CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA) and/or CCLA≧2kσa(TLA/TA).
2. Those securities not satisfying the relationship are excluded from possible trading at the market.
Steps for claim 4:
1. A group of securities potentially desired to be traded are tested on a computer or computer server using a computer program for satisfaction of relationships CCLA≧2CCA(TLA/TA), CCLB≧2CCB(TLB/TB) and/or CCLA≧2kσa(TLA/TA), CCLB≧2kσb(TLB/TB).
2. Those securities not satisfying the relationship are excluded from possible trading at the market.
US14/492,007 2014-09-20 2014-09-20 System and Method of Relative Channel Capacity based securities trading Abandoned US20160086265A1 (en)

Priority Applications (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US14/492,007 US20160086265A1 (en) 2014-09-20 2014-09-20 System and Method of Relative Channel Capacity based securities trading

Applications Claiming Priority (1)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US14/492,007 US20160086265A1 (en) 2014-09-20 2014-09-20 System and Method of Relative Channel Capacity based securities trading

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
US20160086265A1 true US20160086265A1 (en) 2016-03-24

Family

ID=55526162

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US14/492,007 Abandoned US20160086265A1 (en) 2014-09-20 2014-09-20 System and Method of Relative Channel Capacity based securities trading

Country Status (1)

Country Link
US (1) US20160086265A1 (en)

Cited By (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US10719885B1 (en) 2014-05-20 2020-07-21 State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Autonomous feature use monitoring and insurance pricing

Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20150287141A1 (en) * 2014-04-03 2015-10-08 Edgar Parker, JR. Portfolio optimization by the detection and control of the predictive horizon of included investments.

Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20150287141A1 (en) * 2014-04-03 2015-10-08 Edgar Parker, JR. Portfolio optimization by the detection and control of the predictive horizon of included investments.

Cited By (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US10719885B1 (en) 2014-05-20 2020-07-21 State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Autonomous feature use monitoring and insurance pricing

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US11568485B2 (en) Transmission latency leveling apparatuses, methods and systems
AU2019203081A1 (en) Techniques for facilitating electronic trading
US10311515B2 (en) System and method for a semi-lit market
JP6619801B2 (en) System and method for facilitation cross order
US11423479B2 (en) Dynamic peg orders in an electronic trading system
US20180276751A1 (en) Communications protocol based message identification transmission
US11631136B2 (en) Methods and systems for low latency generation and distribution of quote price direction estimates
US11909702B2 (en) Message encoding and transmission across multiple platforms
US20160065449A1 (en) Bandwidth-Weighted Equal Cost Multi-Path Routing
CN107493192B (en) Basic network method for evaluating quality and device for the transmission of video CD N business
US10915956B2 (en) Algorithmic model to allow for order completion at settlement or at close using exchange mandated rules for settlement determination
US7899749B1 (en) System and method for providing intelligent market data snapshots
CN101013955A (en) Fast simulated annealing for traffic matrix estimation
US11063840B1 (en) Methods and systems for predicting successful data transmission during mass communications across computer networks featuring disparate entities and imbalanced data sets using machine learning models
US20160086265A1 (en) System and Method of Relative Channel Capacity based securities trading
CN109345138A (en) A kind of venture evaluation system based on big data
GB2518247A (en) Automated Identification of events in data streams
US20140040062A1 (en) Message Processing
CN109040296A (en) A kind of data push method and system based on long connection
CN110427589A (en) A kind of interest rate risk evaluation method and device

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
STCB Information on status: application discontinuation

Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION